A força jovem como factor de desenvolvimento do continente africano – Líbia uma guerra de agressão!

Líbia/Neo-colonialismo 2011: O continente africano necessita de uma liderança forte, que seja exemplo de democracia e de unidade (nacional e continental), que inspire os mais jovens a amarem e lutarem pela própria terra assim como pelos próprios direitos. Segundo a literatura política, e nisto Marx foi um pioneiro, cada povo tem o governo que merece, sobretudo ali aonde este (povo) pode escolher os próprios representantes. O Silêncio da classe política africana diante dos massacres em Líbia - por parte da OTAN - é tal e qual a posição de uma grande parte dos povos africanos. Muitos são contrários, mas pouco exprimem o própria contrariedade. Reflexos condicionados, desorientamento provocado pela desinformação, desinteresse por questão mais abrangentes, egoísmo agudo que é fruto de uma ocidentalização doentia.

O SILÊNCIO ELOQUENTE - Analisando o percurso da maior parte dos presidentes africanos se notam vários pontos em comum, mas um destes pontos é o mais saliente: o poder lhe foi conferido pela gente, mas oferecido pela ex-potência colonizadora num contexto de influência ocidental. Os países francófonos dependem em modo absurdo da política francesa em África, e aqueles anglófonos, da política inglesa e americana. Raramente um empregado discute com patrão. Neste contexto de colonização avançada, a palavra deve passar aos mais jovens, àqueles que crêem na possibilidade de uma África verdadeiramente independente, começando pela independência económica, o Cavalo de Troia da nova-colonização. Os jovens africanos (dentro e fora da política) devem guiar um novo processo de desenvolvimento nacional e continental, e para fazer-lo devem usar as próprias cabeças. Eu proponho: entrem em política. A política é o instrumento através do qual se gerem os vários interesses presentes em uma sociedade. Política, Política, Política.

O FUTURO É O PRESENTE - Considerando o actual nível de desenvolvimento cultural da maior parte dos países africanos, se pode concluir que um eventual (auto-isolamento) do continente, para fins de reorganização das políticas internas e externas, tendo em conta o actual reequilíbrio do poder mundial seria bem-vindo. Como as grandes caminhadas começam com um passo, a democratização dos Estados africanos deve constituir o primeiro passo desta grande mudança. Mas como sabemos, isto não acontece em dois dias, há que se programar, projectar e realizar, etc. É neste ponto aonde todos os jovens, JOVENS e adulto são chamados a colaborar, a juntos trabalharem pelo bem dos respectivos países. Eu proponho: entrem em política. A política é o instrumento através do qual se gerem os vários interesses presentes em uma sociedade. Política, Política, Política. Cada um seguindo o partido que mais o representa, mas tendo em consideração que própria presença e acção vigorosa pode mudar a estrada da organização na qual se faz parte.

A LEI DO AGORA - Há quem diz que os jovens são o futuro de um país, mas se esquece que são também a força de mudança do presente. As grandes revoluções foram feitas por jovens, até mesmo as lutas pelas independências africanas foram guiadas por jovens, gente fresca e com grandes ideais. Gente capaz de riscar, gente que chega a dar a própria vida por ideais superiores ao do consumismo egoístico que está matando Angola/África. Falando de luta, se espera que ninguém chegue a extremos, nas condições de decidir sobre viver o ou morrer, porque cada um nós vale mais vivo do que morto. Os mortos por ideias superiores têm um valor simbólico que chega a mover montanhas, mas falemos de vida, viver e trabalhar para melhorar vida dos irmãos de sangue e de pátria, seja esta nacional ou continental.

ÁFRICA NOSSA PÁTRIA - Segundo um ditado africano, "quando vês a lavra do vizinho queimar vás súbito ajudar-lo, porque o mesmo foto bem cedo vai lamber a tua colheita". Além do orgulho doentio dos africanos em querer diferenciar-se, temos significativas práticas e costumes iguais, para não citar o destino: ditaduras, subdesenvolvimentos, ingerências, neo-colonialismo, etc. Quem viaja pela África Sugsahariana veja sempre as mesmas coisas - estamos no mesmo barco. Assim sendo, é do nosso interesse que nos preocupemos pela unidade do continente, aprendamos mais línguas para poder entender os problemas dos outros países assim como partilhar as soluções que se encontram de povo em povo. O interesse depende de cada um de nós, temos que deixar de culpar a classe política, os meios de informação, é sempre culpa dos outros. BASTA! O futuro de África depende dos africanos, todos repetem estas palavras, mas poucos trabalham para a sua concretização.
Aos estudantes universitários, mais colaborações entre associações e faculdades. Às ONG's, mais colaborações e interesse entre as outras congéneres africanas. Ás igrejas, mais encontros regionais e continentais. AOS POLÍTICOS, sobretudo os jovens, mais interesse pelas questões regionais e continentais. União dos partidos e encontros regio-continentais. Tudo depende das nossas acções. África é a berço da humanidade, por isso creio que devemos ainda descobrir as nossas verdadeiras potencialidade. Comecemos trabalhando pelas democracias nas nossas casas, trabalhos, partidos, escolas. QUEM CONSEGUE GERIR O POUCO, é mais preparado a gerir as grandes quantidades. África hoje e sempre.

Caríssimos/as, entrem em política, porque a qualidade de vida de um país depende da qualidade da classe política que a governa. A política é o instrumento através do qual se gerem os vários interesses presentes em uma sociedade. Política, Política, Política. Cada um seguindo o partido que mais o representa, mas tendo em consideração que própria presença e acção vigorosa pode mudar a estrada da organização na qual se faz parte.

 

Francisco Pacavira

 

 

|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

 

Libya: A Children’s War

 

Khalid Hallil was inside his house three miles from the centre. His left thigh is torn from knee to crotch. His father Hamid speaks English: “Metal just came from everywhere. Believe me, there were no soldiers in the area. Only civilians. There was no reason for attacking us in our homes. No justification for this murderous act. Tell your countrymen what is happening.“

This is what your Democrat/Republican/Progressive state legislators support, Blood for Oil… via last May’s disgraceful JRH51: Joint resolution supporting the assignment of the F-35 aircraft to the Vermont Air National Guard… rushed through the legislature in a closed vote, at which no Vermonters were permitted to testify.

I don’t think we can stop Washington, DC from any war that it wishes to fight, nor do I believe that Welch, Sanders & Leahy can be compelled by their constituents to obey their oaths of office, and stop supporting these unconstitutional, brutal and unforgivable wars and occupations. But we CAN stop Vermont’s participation in, and funding of these wars: keep the F-35 out… bring the Vermont Guard home, bills to bring home ALL our kids placed in harms way… and the world will notice.

To do this we must vote out the incumbents, starting with the Vermont Senate. 30 seats. We can do it, will you run with us? I’m recruiting senators… the pay’s decent, we’ve got six so far.

Here’s the real story of the latest war. I apologise in advance for the disturbing imagery, but it’s the truth about what the US and its NATO allies do: constantly grabbing for more and more resources that belong to others… as the children suffer and die.

The most telling part is the Times quote at the end of the article:

Colonel Qaddafi proved to be a problematic partner for the international oil companies, frequently raising fees and taxes and making other demands. A new government with close ties to NATO may be an easier partner for Western nations to deal with. Some experts say that given a free hand, oil companies could find considerably more oil in Libya than they were able to locate under the restrictions placed by the Qaddafi government.

Fierce fighting continues in Tripoli
By Bill Van Auken
23 August 2011
Source: Military Industry Today on military.einnews.com

Fierce fighting raged into the night in Tripoli Monday, even as leaders of the major Western powers proclaimed the end of the 42-year-old regime of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and maneuvered for position in the scramble for Libya’s oil wealth.

After their surprisingly rapid advance into the Libyan capital, the armed groups backed by NATO have encountered stiff resistance from forces loyal to the Gaddafi regime. The crowds that initially greeted the so-called “rebels” melted away and streets remained largely deserted as the two sides exchanged automatic weapons fire as well as mortar and anti-aircraft rounds.

Heavy fighting continued around Gaddafi’s fortified Bab al-Aziziya presidential compound, while smoke billowed over sections of the city. A spokesman for the NATO-backed Transitional National Council (TNC) based in Benghazi predicted that the fortified compound would not fall easily and fighting there would be “fierce.” The huge Tripoli compound has been subjected to heavy bombardment by NATO warplanes.

While the TNC has claimed to control between 80 and 90 percent of the Libyan capital, reporters in the city have described the situation as “fluid,” and few checkpoints have been set up to secure the streets.

BBC correspondent Orla Guerin reported that east of Tripoli “the battle is not over,” and that the Benghazi-based militias had been blocked from entering the capital by loyalist forces holding the highway near the coastal town of Zlitan, about 80 miles east of the capital. While captured on Friday by the TNC forces, the town came under a counterattack from government troops on Monday.

 

Libyan government spokesman Moussa Ibrahim told journalists late Sunday that 1,300 Libyans had died in the capital over the previous 24 hours as a result of the fighting and NATO air strikes. Another 5,000 were reported injured.

While launched under the pretense of protecting civilians from the repression of the Gaddafi regime, the US-NATO war has since claimed far more victims than were threatened by Gaddafi’s security forces and, in its final stages, has involved major war crimes, including the heavy bombardment and use of Apache attack helicopters in Tripoli, a city of 2 million.

The BBC quoted a Tripoli resident as reporting that the NATO-backed guerrillas were “breaking into people’s houses, stealing everything.” He predicted that the siege of the capital would be “a disaster for Libya and NATO.”

 

While the speed of the NATO-backed force’s entry into Tripoli was no doubt facilitated by the internal collapse of Gaddafi’s corrupt and dictatorial regime, reports published Monday in both the New York Times and the Washington Post made it clear that the advance of the “rebels” had been directed, both on the ground and in the air, by the Western powers intervening in the oil-rich North African country.

As the Washington Post reported, the success of the siege of Tripoli was the result of a strategy implemented by “British, French and Qatari special forces on the ground” as well as “an earlier decision by the Obama administration to share additional intelligence on the positions of Libyan government forces.”

Citing NATO as well as US military and intelligence sources, the Post said the operation was designed to “create a ‘pincer,’ driving forces loyal to Moammar Gaddafi back from all directions to protect Tripoli. In the process, government troops would provide clear targets for NATO air strikes and the roads would be clear for the rebel advance.”

 

 

“The targeting shifted toward Tripoli over the last four or five days as the regime forces moved back…and the target set [in the capital] became larger,” a senior NATO official told the Post. In other words, the function of the “rebels” was largely to push the Gaddafi forces into a position where they could be slaughtered from the air.

The report also makes it clear that the US played a crucial role in this process by providing NATO warplanes as well as French and British special operations units on the ground with detailed satellite imagery as well as intelligence intercepts from the National Security Agency, allowing for far more accurate and rapid targeting of Libyan government troops.

Asked about charges that, in violation of the United Nations resolution, NATO was acting essentially as the air force of the “rebels,” the NATO official acknowledged that “the effect of what we were doing was not dissimilar.”

The New York Times also quoted US and NATO officials who cited “an intensification of American aerial surveillance in and around the capital city” as the “major factor in helping to tilt the balance after months of steady erosion of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s military.” The newspaper reported that “coordination between NATO and the rebels” had become “more sophisticated and lethal in recent weeks.” It also credited the fact that “Britain, France and other nations deployed special forces on the ground inside Libya.”

 

Meanwhile, the Pentagon released figures Monday showing that the US military had doubled its air strikes in Libya over the past 12 days. While between April 1 and August 10 US warplanes were carrying out on average 1.7 strikes a day, since August 10 they have risen to 3.1 air strikes, with close to half of them being carried out by pilotless Predator drones.

The cost to the US of the military intervention in the North African country is fast approaching $1 billion, CNN reported Monday.

According to the most recent poll by the television news network, only 35 percent of the American public supported the war, with 60 percent opposing the US intervention in Libya.

Interrupting his vacation in Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts, President Barack Obama proclaimed that the events in Tripoli made it clear that “Gaddafi’s rule is over” and called for an “inclusive transition that will lead to a democratic Libya.”

The president vowed that Washington would be Libya’s “friend and a partner.” He continued, “We will join with allies and partners to continue the work of safeguarding the people of Libya.” He said his administration was in discussion with NATO and the United Nations to “determine other steps that we can take.”

The Wall Street Journal quoted US military commanders Monday as saying that, while they believe an international “peacekeeping” force will be needed in Libya, “The Obama administration has made clear to its allies that they shouldn’t expect American troops to participate.”

The Journal cited government officials who said the Pentagon “would like to establish a security-assistance presence in a new Libya. This could include military-liaison officers, as well as American trainers who would work with Libyan security forces.”

Among those calling for the US to put “boots on the ground” in the aftermath of Gaddafi’s ouster is Richard Haass, the former State Department official and current president of the Council on Foreign Relations, who was initially critical of the US intervention. In an opinion piece published by the Financial Times of London, Haass writes: “NATO’s airplanes helped bring about the rebel victory. The ‘humanitarian’ intervention introduced to save lives believed to be threatened was in fact a political intervention introduced to bring about regime change.

“Now NATO has to deal with its own success. Some sort of international assistance, and most likely an international force, is likely to be needed for some time to restore and maintain order… Most importantly, US President Barack Obama may need to reconsider his assertion that there would not be any American boots on the ground; leadership is hard to assert absent participation.”

Afghan men peer into a car carrying a dead Afghan child in Lashkar Gah, Helmand Province, Afghanistan, Thursday, Nov. 5, 2009. Villagers in southern Afghanistan claimed an overnight air strike by international forces killed several civilians, including children. (AP Photo/Abdul Khaleq)

German Chancellor Angela Merkel also called for international action in Libya. “We must quickly create political structures which will enable a transition from the current situation into a peaceful, democratic and free society,” she said.

While Germany abstained on the United Nations Security Council vote authorizing the imposition of a “no-fly zone” in Libya and refused to provide warplanes for the air strikes, the country’s defense minister, Thomas de Maiziere, told the daily Rheinische Post that the Merkel government would consider sending troops for a “peacekeeping” operation after Gaddafi’s removal from power. “Should the Bundeswehr be asked to join in, we will review such a request constructively,” he said.

For his part, French President Nicolas Sarkozy invited the head of the National Transitional Council, Mustafa Abdel Jalil, to Paris for consultations, while Foreign Minister Alain Juppe announced that France would convene a meeting of the Libyan “contact group,” which also includes Britain, the US, Qatar and representatives of the UN and other international bodies.

In London, British Prime Minister David Cameron delivered a statement outside of No. 10 Downing Street proclaiming that Britain would do all it could to “support the will of the Libyan people, which is for an effective transition to a free, democratic and inclusive Libya.” The first priority, he added, was “to establish security in Tripoli.”

After praising the role of the British pilots who relentlessly bombed Libya over the past five months, Cameron added a note of false modesty: “This has not been our revolution, but we can be proud that we have played our part.”

On the contrary, the so-called “revolution” has in fact been a coup sponsored by the major imperialist powers working with the big energy conglomerates and executed by US, British and French military and intelligence. Using the upheavals in neighboring Egypt and Tunisia as cover, and a “humanitarian” mission as pretext, these powers launched a colonial-style war with the aim of toppling the Gaddafi regime and installing a more pliant client regime in Tripoli.

Behind all of the talk about aiding “democracy” and providing assistance, these powers and the major oil companies whose interests they promote are now scrambling to get as big a share as possible in a new carve-up of Libya’s oil reserves, the largest on the African continent.

A spokesman for the ACOCO oil firm created by the “rebels” with NATO’s backing announced on Monday that a post-Gaddafi regime would reorder contracts to the benefit of the Western powers and at the expense of their rivals.

“We don’t have a problem with Western countries like Italians, French and UK companies,” said the spokesman, Abdeljalil Mayouf. “But we have some political issues with Russia, China and Brazil.” The three latter countries abstained on the UN Security Council resolution authorizing the use of force and voiced opposition to the US-NATO intervention.

All three countries have billions of dollars in investments in Libya. Prior to the US-NATO war, there were 75 Chinese companies operating in Libya, employing 36,000 workers on some 50 projects. Russian companies, including the oil firms Gazprom Neft and Tatneft, had operated in the country, and Brazil’s state-owned energy conglomerate Petrobras and construction firm Odebrecht were also involved in major deals there.

“We have lost Libya completely,” Aram Shegunts, director general of the Russia-Libya Business Council, told Reuters.

“Our companies won’t be given the green light to work there,” he added. “If anyone thinks otherwise, they are wrong. Our companies will lose everything because NATO will prevent them from doing their business in Libya.”

Meanwhile, major European oil companies saw their stock prices rise precipitously on expectations that they would reap bonanzas from renegotiated deals with a NATO-installed regime in Libya. ENI, Italy’s government-created oil multinational, led the way with a 7 percent rise.

Italy’s foreign minister, Franco Frattini, reported that ENI representatives had already arrived in Libya to survey prospects for renewed exploitation of the country’s oil resources. Before the war, ENI had the largest operations of any foreign oil corporation in Libya. Frattini predicted that after a new regime was installed there would be “great opportunities” for Italian corporations.

Italy exercised brutal colonial rule over Libya from 1911 to 1943, killing off half the country’s population in its suppression of resistance.

The Houston-based Marathon Oil Corp. announced on Monday that it has also been in talks with the “rebels” about resuming exploitation of the Waha oil fields, located in Libya’s Sirte basin.

The British daily Telegraph reported Monday that “Both David Cameron and President Sarkozy are anxious to reap the rewards for the NATO air offensive by ensuring that British or French companies are in the vanguard of the international effort to help the new regime restore law and order and rebuild the economy.” Both governments, the newspaper said, are conducting a “dialogue” with the TNC on infrastructure projects and “lining up construction and other infrastructure companies to be ready with bids.”

In an article titled “The Scramble for Access to Libya’s Oil Wealth Begins,” the New York Times provided a frank justification for the US-NATO “humanitarian” war:

“Colonel Qaddafi proved to be a problematic partner for the international oil companies, frequently raising fees and taxes and making other demands. A new government with close ties to NATO may be an easier partner for Western nations to deal with. Some experts say that given a free hand, oil companies could find considerably more oil in Libya than they were able to locate under the restrictions placed by the Qaddafi government.”

Children are victims of US/NATO aggression. Where are your Vermont Legislators, besides closing schools to better support

Souce

Tripoli/NATO WAR: Globalist Richard Haas Calls for NATO Occupation of Libya

Or, "How the Devil Pays"
By Tony Cartalucci

The Financial Times has featured an editorial penned by Council on Foreign Relations president Richard Haas titled, "Libya Now Needs Boots on the Ground," where the arch globalist states that Libya's rebels are in no way capable of rebuilding Libya properly and will require an "international force" to maintain order. Haas breathtakingly admits that the NATO intervention to "protect civilians" was in fact a political intervention designed to bring about regime change. With NATO leading the offensive against Tripoli, a relatively calm city until now, the alleged cause of "protecting civilians" rings hollower than ever.


Photo: One of the founding fathers of Al Qaeda, Robert Gates (left) and CFR president Richard Haas (right).

Haas goes on to explain that NATO's "success" is what requires this international assistance in the predictable form of an occupation force to deal with looting, "die-hard regime supporters," and tribal war. Haas also implores Obama to reconsider his decision to rule out American boots on the ground and to do so quickly.
Of course, NATO didn't just spend the last 5 months conducting 7,000+ airstrikes on Libya to "protect civilians" and then ride off into the sunset. This was a war of conquest from the very beginning, with globalists openly declaring it would determine the "primacy of international law" over the nation-state. In fact, the initial uprising itself was gestated in Washington and London where opposition leaders were provided resources and safe-havens to conduct their sedition, with globalist stooges like Ibrahim Sahad literally sitting in front of the White House calling for NATO to bomb his homeland. NATO, its members, particularly the US, UK, and France, and the globalist corporate-financiers behind them, fully intend to rebuild Libya according to their own aspirations shoehorned into a national consensus imposed upon the Libyan people under the guise of "democracy" and "civil society." We are watching a modern empire expand its boundaries into yet another sovereign nation.

Readers may remember an April 2011 article titled "Libyan Rebels Fighting the Globalists' War" with the ever increasingly appropriate subtitle, "How the Devil Pays." In it a caption attempts to sum up Libya's future by stating, "if these rebels really think the West is going to hand them Libya and its riches, they have another thing coming. The Neo-Con arm of the globalist agenda is already seeding the ground to deal with "extremists" coming to power after the "Arab Spring" runs its course. That means Libya's oil & future will be left in the hands of NATO troops, not the Libyan people."
The article continues:
"While the dichotomy of Western politics is merely for public consumption, what each camp states publicly can be put together as a composite giving us a clearer picture of the overall globalist agenda. Neo-Conservative war monger Daniel Pipes, a PNAC signatory, CFR member, and co-conspirator in many of the darkest chapters of recent American history, was recently sharing his "doubts" over the final result of the "Arab Spring." He believes that ultimately extremists will prevail in many cases and only complicate US relations with certain countries.
Of course, Pipes most likely didn't miss the memo and is fully aware that the "Arab Spring" is a US funded gambit, one his fellow "Neo-Cons" lining the National Endowment for Democracy and the fraudulent Freedom House are admittedly involved in. At the very least, he must have picked up the New York Times and read as much. So what exactly is Pipes trying to tell us? He is saying that as soon as the Libyan rebels secure Libya, or the Muslim Brotherhood takes hold of Syria, or Yemen, or wins out in a co-opted counterrevolution against International Crisis Group stooge Mohamed ElBaradei in Egypt, the blinders Western propagandists seem to be wearing will suddenly drop and point out that indeed the globalists have installed extremists "by accident."
To rectify this, Libyan rebels will be betrayed just as quickly as Qaddafi was. They will be removed from power, and replaced by Western stooges protected by NATO ground troops, conveniently already being put on the ground in Libya, and will stay there permanently. The globalist "Neo-Con" think tank Foreign Policy Initiative has stated, "The best way to reduce the potential dangers posed by extremist infiltration is for the United States and its allies to remain engaged in Libya."
This engagement most likely will take the shape of the other unending "engagements" in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the years of cross-border raids into Pakistan. The oil money that once built water ways, public housing, and farms from Benghazi to Tripoli, will be funneled directly out of the country and into the corporate-financier's accounts. The corporate-financier oligarchs will have taken yet another nation-state down with the help of its own gullible population, and for their gullibility, they will pay for the rest of their lives, as will their children and their children's children.
To understand the full scope of the global corporate-financier oligarchy's designs toward any given nation, we must simply look back at the brazen admissions made over the intended future stemming from the outright military conquest of Iraq and Paul Bremer's (CFR) planned economic reformation of the broken nation. The Economist enumerates the "economic liberalization" of Iraq in a piece titled "Let's all go to the yard sale: If it all works out, Iraq will be a capitalist's dream:"
1. 100% ownership of Iraqi assets.
2. Full repatriation of profits.
3. Equal legal standing with local firms.
4. Foreign banks allowed to operate or buy into local banks.
5. Income and corporate taxes capped at 15%.
6. Universal tariffs slashed to 5%.
Anyone who would willfully make a deal with such people must have their discernment called into question. As Hugo Chavez of Venezuela said of Hosni Mubarak's decades of appeasing the globalists and his eventual ousting from power at the hands of US funded, trained, and supported protesters, "that's how the devil pays." Indeed it is, and it is an instructive lesson for others including the rebels of Benghazi to consider as they attempt to make their own deals with the globalists today."
And indeed, as NATO rushes through to the finish line with a spectacular display of mass-murder and mayhem in Libya, and with the rebels dancing in the streets as NATO warplanes roar overhead, the time is soon approaching for Benghazi to pay back the West for their "help."
As pundits in the duplicitous corporate media feign ignorance over the future of Libya, as if it is truly in the hands of the Libyan people as Obama cartoonishly portrayed in his latest teleprompter reading, the self-proclaimed "Transitional National Council" leader Gibril Elqarfally gave us cyrstal clear picture of Libya's future - one inspired by globalization. In a May 12, 2011 talk before the Brookings Institution, he claimed “what’s taking place is a natural product of the globalizational process that started in the mid-80′s.”
Elwarfally talks about a “new global cultural paradigm,” “new global values,” common values, shared by many “young people.” These young people, he says, are calling for human dignity, democracy, and inclusion at all levels of national government, repeating verbatim statements coming from geopolitical meddler Zbigniew Brzezinski and the myriad of US-funded NGOs that promote these “new global values.”


Photo: Libyan rebel leader Gibril Elqarfally stands before the Fortune 500-funded Brookings Institution openly declaring fealty to the globalist agenda of interdependency and subservience to a Wall Street-London international order.

....

When asked by an audience member what Libya will look like in 2025, it turns out conveniently he was part of a study by Libyan professors and “Libyan practitioners” in 2007-2008 titled “Libya: Vision 2025.” Not surprisingly, this project was conducted with input from the IMF and involved Libya’s placement within the “global scene.” Elwarfally laments that Libya’s oil reserves are limited and that the solution is a transition to a service economy. He also claims Vision 2025′s conclusion included an education shift, turning Libya into “a lake” to develop the skills of Africans to serve the needs of the European Union.

Surely Africans are eager to once again be in the service of wealthy Europeans, who at one point owned tremendous swaths of their continent, some tycoons naming entire nations after themselves in the ultimate expression of imperial megalomania. Elwarfally, a man educated in Pittsburgh, and apparently a lifelong fan of globalization, stuns us with his frank comments and his disturbing vision for the future of not only Libya, but the role it will play in directing Africa’s efforts and resources toward American and European corporate-financier interests.

While Qaddafi's comments are dismissed out of hand, a recent message sent to his followersamidst fighting in Tripoli declared, "the traitors are paving the way for the occupation forces to be deployed in Tripoli." It seems no truer words have ever been spoken and the Libyan people, including the rebels, will have no one but themselves to blame if they allow such a way to be paved.

Source

It's Official: International Criminal Court has ZERO Mandate - Rejection by African Union of ICC's Qaddafi arrest

Rejection by African Union of ICC's Qaddafi arrest warrant reveals ICC as hoax.
by Tony Cartalucci

If an entire continent rejects an alleged international institution's actions as illegitimate and self-serving, does said institution still get to call itself "international?" Furthermore, does it still hold any sort of mandate to continue on as self-proclaimed international arbiter? Certainly not, and for the International Criminal Court, whose "arrest warrant" for Libyan leader Moammar Qaddafi was soundly rejected by the 53-member African Union, their last shred of self-proclaimed credibility has been rendered moot.

Photo: NATO munitions strike a residential area in Tripoli. With the UN resolution being illegitimate to begin with, with NATO members incrementally violating their own contrived resolution on a daily basis, and now with an entire continent rejecting the ICC's "arrest warrant" for Qaddafi, the West's adventure in Libya, and the "international order" it is upholding are beginning to show their true, tenuous, and very illegitimate colors.

....

The arrest warrant itself is based on ICC's own "investigation." The ICC said, "in the course of its investigation, due to unprecedented cooperation from different States and organisations (none of which are currently working in Libya), the Office of the Prosecutor has been able to collect extensive documentation and evidence in a short period of time, through 30 missions to 11 States, and through interviews with a large number of persons, including key insiders and eyewitnesses. " Such a premise is so recklessly irresponsible, so baseless, and so morally bankrupt, it is easy to see why the African Union has such a difficult time accepting it.

A look over this "evidence" presented by the "Office of the Prosecutor" reveals a "cut & paste" bonanza of articles and reports taken from disingenuous organizations funded by the same corporations and foundations that contrived the ICC itself. The entire basis of the "Prosecutor's" case is built upon reports taken from BBC, Al Jazeera, the London Guardian, New York Times, the US State Department's Broadcasting Board of Governors-run Voice of America, the globalist-funded Human Rights Rights Watch, and the National Endowment for Democracy and Tides Foundation-funded International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), among many, many others.

The International Criminal Court itself claims to be, "an independent, permanent court that investigates and prosecutes persons accused of the most serious crimes of international concern, namely genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes." A visit to the Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CICC) site reveals just who is behind the ICC, who is actively promoting it and networking with the ICC's various NGO partners, and the fact that all involved boast the same financial and political supporters.

The CICC claims to include, "2,500 civil society organizations in 150 different countries working in partnership to strengthen international cooperation with the ICC; ensure that the Court is fair, effective and independent; make justice both visible and universal; and advance stronger national laws that deliver justice to victims of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide." The CICC however, also is "deeply appreciative of the generous support" provided by the European Union, the Ford Foundation, the Fortune 500-lined John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, George Soros' Open Society Institute, and Humanity United.

Humanity United in turn boast partnerships with the globalist co-conspirators of BBC World Service Trust, NED/Open Society/US State Department-funded Benetech, George Soros'Open Society Institute, and the NED-funded Solidarity Center which mobilized Egypt's labor unions just as the US-stoked unrest began to falter. These "generous supporters" are literally the same organizations that have built up the very "civil society organizations" the CICC is "working in partnership" with, and the same disingenuous organizations supplying the fake, contrived ICC with "evidence" to issue its "arrest warrants" with.

African Union executive Jean Ping called the ICC discriminatory, going only after "crimes" committed in Africa while ignoring those committed by the West in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. The AU has also condemned France for its blatant violation of the already illegitimate UNSC r.1973 by dropping weapons to Libya's Al-Qaeda-linked rebels.

Meanwhile, US National Endowment for Democracy-funded Project on Middle East Democracy reported that in reaction to Libya's threats to fight back against NATO aggression, U.S. State Department Spokesman Mark Toner said, "This is an individual who is obviously capable of carrying out these kinds of threats. It’s what makes him so dangerous. But we continue to carry out the NATO mission, while at the same time increasing pressure on him to step aside." Like France air-dropping weapons to admitted terrorists, the US attempting to remove Qaddafi is a direct violation of the NATO coalition's own contrived UN resolution. That the ICC isn't filing cases against NATO members for their multitude of crimes, and the fact that an entire continent has rejected the ICC's decision, settles the fact for all concerned that the contrived organization holds absolutely no legitimacy.

Source

Tripoli 22/08/2011: menaces de mort sur Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya et Thierry Meyssan

Thierry Meyssan est à Tripoli depuis le 23 juin dernier. Il y a d’abord dirigé une équipe d’enquêteurs du Réseau Voltaire. Il mène depuis deux mois un travail d’information journalistique sur le conflit. Ses positions se distinguent de celles de ses confrères : il décrit la rébellion comme étant minoritaire et permettant de justifier aux yeux de l’opinion publique internationale une classique opération militaire.
Quelles que soient les positions défendues par Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya et Thierry Meyssan, leur assassinat serait inacceptable. Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya et Thierry Meyssan ne sont pas des combattants, mais des journalistes. Les personnes qui soutiennent cette guerre en pensant qu’elle est menée pour la démocratie et la liberté ne peuvent accepter qu’on assassine des journalistes.

Tripoli : le Réseau Voltaire s’inquiète des menaces de mort qui pèsent sur Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya et Thierry Meyssan
Réseau Voltaire, lundi 22 août 2011, 13h20 GMT –

Le Réseau Voltaire s’inquiète des menaces qui pèsent sur deux de ses collaborateurs à Tripoli. Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, chercheur associé du Centre for Research on Globalization, et Thierry Meyssan, président-fondateur du Réseau Voltaire et de la conférence Axis for Peace, sont retranchés dans l’hôtel Rixos autour duquel d’importants combats ont lieu. L’ordre aurait été donné de les abattre.
Thierry Meyssan est à Tripoli depuis le 23 juin dernier. Il y a d’abord dirigé une équipe d’enquêteurs du Réseau Voltaire. Il mène depuis deux mois un travail d’information journalistique sur le conflit. Ses positions se distinguent de celles de ses confrères : il décrit la rébellion comme étant minoritaire et permettant de justifier aux yeux de l’opinion publique internationale une classique opération militaire.
Quelles que soient les positions défendues par Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya et Thierry Meyssan, leur assassinat serait inacceptable. Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya et Thierry Meyssan ne sont pas des combattants, mais des journalistes. Les personnes qui soutiennent cette guerre en pensant qu’elle est menée pour la démocratie et la liberté ne peuvent accepter qu’on assassine des journalistes.
À l’heure actuelle, cinq États leur ont offert leur protection diplomatique. Mais les combats autour de l’hôtel les empêchent de sortir et plusieurs de ces ambassades ont été encerclées afin de rendre tout accès impossible.
Sachant les menaces qui pèsent sur eux, Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya et Thierry Meyssan ne s’exposent pas à des « balles perdues ».
Le Réseau Voltaire appelle les citoyens des pays impliqués dans la guerre à faire pression sur leurs gouvernements afin d’assurer la sécurité de ces journalistes. Il demande à chacun de jouer son rôle de citoyen et de faire circuler cette information.

---

Pour en savoir plus :
Articles de Thierry Meyssan :
http://www.voltairenet.org/_Thierry-Meyssan_?lang=fr
Articles à propos de Thierry Meyssan :
http://www.voltairenet.org/+-Meyssan-Thierry-+?lang=fr
Articles de Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya :
http://www.voltairenet.org/_Mahdi-Darius-Nazemroaya_?lang=fr

Articles du Réseau Voltaire sur la Libye :
http://www.voltairenet.org/+-Libye-+?lang=fr

http://www.alterinfo.net/Tripoli-le-Reseau-Voltaire-s-inquiete-des-menaces-de-mort-qui-pesent-sur-Mahdi-Darius-Nazemroaya-et-Thierry-Meyssan_a62681.html/

Fake Social Media Messages Led To War Against Libya on 22 Aug. 2011, by Marinella Correggia

The mother of all lies was sent to the world through a twitter message by Al Arabiya, February 23th. A message which makes Qadafi out to be a Hitler, and even more outrageous and cruel: "the repression in Libya has already claimed 10,000 dead and 50,000 injured."

It may be a ballon d'essai to check if the world was able to swallow it; it did: Even the progressive people in Europe said:

"We must stop the genocide."

"Bengazi is like Guernica."

But who is the source of this news? It was the terrorist rebels indeed (who kept repeating it): Al Arabyia says it received the news from "Sayed al Shanuka, Libyan member of the International Criminal Court, who was interviewed from Paris"

February 24th, just one day after the "genocide news," the International Criminal Court dismisses that man: "A clarification on media information regarding the ICC position on the Libyan situation is necessary. Various media sources have published information regarding the situation in Libya attributed to Mr Sayed Al Shanuka (or El-Hadi Shallouf), presented as a "member of the International Criminal Court" (ICC).

The ICC wishes to clarify that this person is neither a staff member nor counsel currently practicing before it, and by no means can he speak on behalf of the Court. Any declaration he made is given solely in his personal capacity.

The only official position to date is the ICC Prosecutor's statement, published on 23 February 2011. The decision to seek justice in Libya should be taken by the Libyan people. Currently, the Libyan State is not a Party to the Rome Statute. Therefore, intervention by the ICC on the alleged crimes committed in Libya can occur only if the Libyan authorities accept the jurisdiction of the Court, (through article 12(3) of the Rome Statute).

In the absence of such a step, the United Nations Security Council can decide to refer the situation to the Court. The Office of the Prosecutor will act only after either decision is taken."

But nobody seems to notice this official statement.

A few days later, March 3rd, it is Ali Zeidan's turn, a self-appinted spokesperson from the Libyan League for Human Rights which always, only from Paris, presents more terrifying data: 6,000 victims (3,000 in Tripoli, 2,000 in Benghazi, 1,000 elsewhere). But Zeidan's denunciation is not published in the LLHT website, and by the way Zeidan is not the president nor the director: another fake source. Zeidan is indeed a spokesperson of Benghazi terrorists. And he is the same Zeidan who, on March 23rd, stated: "In future oil agreements, we will remember those who helpd us" (by bombing more!).

It is indeed this data, 10,000 or 6,000 victims in a few days of protests, plus those allegedly "injured by Qadafi," which is taken as gold by the Human Rights Council in Geneva.

(But when in June the chief Prosecutor Ocampo issues a warrant for the three, the figure is no longer 6,000 but 208).

No matter, it is the huge figure which is used as the basis for the UN resolutions and for the war. The assumption is that if, in few days, "Qadafi killed so many people, what will happen if Libyan tanks enter Benghazi?" Indeed Dennis Ross, the White House political advisor, then stated: "Up to 100,000 people could be killed and everybody will blame us if we don't intervene."

This is what the UN resolutions and the war are based on... a tweet from a fake source.

(By the way, even in former wars in the past 20 years, there were fake smoking guns: incubators switched off in Kuwait City by Iraqi soldiers; weapons of mass destruction, mass graves and girls crying in front of a camera that they escaped death or rape).

About Marinella Correggia - Ecopeace activist since 1991, author, committed now against the awful NATO war against Libya

Around 100 civilians killed in increased NATO bombing of Tripoli, Libya, Africa (22/08/2011)

Around 100 civilians killed in increased NATO bombing of Tripoli, Libya, Africa

21.08.2011

"Tonight NATO carried out heavy bombings of several districts in Tripoli. As a result, about 100 people were killed, civilians among them. Rescuers are still working, which is why the exact number of the dead and wounded is still unknown.

Right after the bombing, gunfire was heard in the outskirts of the Libyan capital. Western media immediately reported that rebels had entered the city, and civil war started", said a representative of the Libyan Embassy in Moscow.

According to him, "some of the gunmen were arrested. Close inspection of the site showed that the rebels had been imitating clashes with the army and the police. Some of the rebels were wearing police and army uniforms. The recordings of the action made with professional cameras, were later to be sent to Western media. Some of the recording media were seized. The backdrop commentaries leave no doubt that it was only an imitation".

The Libyan Embassy representative also said that "there are still some "sleeping cells" in Tripoli at the moment, acting against the government".

"Records showing dead bodies were also seized from the arrested. Voice over contends that those are the participants of anti-Gaddafi demonstrations in Tripoli, supposedly killed by the "bloody regime". The dates at the recordings, however, are the 22nd and the 23rd of August. The background clearly indicates that the recordings were made in Benghazi, but not in Tripoli", added the Embassy representative.

Meanwhile, according to a Russian military-diplomatic source, the operation aimed at Gaddafi's elimination and forming of public opinion by NATO special forces "is about to start any moment".

"Our data show that there are 15-17 small diversionary groups acting in Tripoli and its outskirts. Most of their members are employed by private US and British military companies. There are also saboteurs from the Foreign Legion. The acts of sabotage committed, there will be a helicopter landing in Tripoli airport, NATO special services troops onboard in order to [do so under the excuse to] protect civilians", he added.

He also said that this information has been forwarded to the Russian government.

About ElenDorado

Born on 12.11.1978, researcher, teacher, translator, Ph.D. in Linguistics, specialize in Sociolinguistics

By Alexander Grigoryev

Dr. Moussa Ibrahim August 21st Press Conference on NATO Massacre in Tripoli

When NATO has lost the war and the west has collapsed from the falsehood it is built upon, clear documentation will show the media war, never clearer and with more proofs than Libya. Another reason NATO does not want to stop so as to hope to avoid future prosecution for crimes against humanity.

Tripoli (mathaba) -- The world is responsible and witness to the crimes being committed against Libyans in Tripoli, with NATO increasing bombing on and around Tripoli to offer support to rebels entering the previously peaceful city. The death toll last night 20th August was 376 dead and almost 900 injured. This includes NATO attacks on check points, army, soldiers and streets and neighbourhoods, others committed by rebels.
Confirmation from Libyan General People's Committee for Health has meanwhile come to light with statistics showing that since midday 21st August up to 11pm, during 11 hours of violence, with now 1300 have been killed in Tripoli alone and 5000 injured and the hospitals cannot cope.
The world can see that a peaceful city where journalists were living for many months is being attacked by NATO and attacking the heart of a peaceful civilian city, an army that is in defensive positions, and is attacking volunteers who came out of their houses, leaving their mothers, fathers, sisters and brothers,
to defend their city and NATO gives direct air cover to these armed gangs who have no political project.
The rebels want revenge, filled with hatred, supported by tribal conflict and bitterness from recent years, to destroy this city, especially the tribes, citizens and neighbourhoods that are well known for supporting Muammar Qaddafi.
We expect the death toll to rise beyond anyone's imagination. Supported by the might of NATO, without which the armed gangs would not be able to move a meter, face our army and tribes and families and volunteers, but because NATO kills anything that moves in front of the rebels, the rebels are able to advance.
We appeal to the world, to the heart of this world. People in my city are being killed, day in and day out, without any way out without any possible way for negotiations. We have talked before that you cannot condition peace, you have to sit down, talk and then discuss everything. Who has the right to take an agenda outside the peace talks, and say you cannot discuss this.
We said before we have accepted the African Union road map, we accept negotiations and talks, we can sit down with all parties, achieve peace and agree how to move forward for Libya, but no one wants to listen because all NATO cares about is to destroy the Libyan political system so that it can have a political system that will fulfil its own desires, not the desire of the Libyan nation, but the desires of NATO.
A most significant proportion of the Libyan people made their views very clear when they came out on the streets [with green flags and photos of Muammar Qaddafi], in their millions. Should these people not be heard, listened to and believed?
1300 dead, 5000 injured, in just 11 hours, our hospitals are unable to cope with such a disaster, the red cross is here in Tripoli while hoping to help, but the security situation is quite difficult.
We are very resilient and still very strong, we have thousands and thousands of fighters still remaining, who have nowhere to go but to fight, so this will increase and increase and the death toll will increase because each side is terrified of the other side if they will win. So let us suspend all military operations and violence.
NATO can order the rebels to stop immediately, we can order our troops and volunteers to stop immediately and then we sit. And the same as the rebels have their leader or leaders who will lead their negotiations and without them the rebels would be lost or destroyed, we too have our leader, Muammar Qaddafi. We need him to lead us for peace and a way out of this. If you take Muammar Qaddafi out of the equation a whole side will collapse and become an easy pray for the other side. That is why people are fighting for Qaddafi.
You cannot deprive millions of people of the leader they choose and they want and let them be easy pray for a vengeful, hateful side, disorganized, without a proper leadership, you saw them they killed their own commander of their army, they are penetrated with Al-Qaida elements, they are very tribal.
So we hold the world responsible. They have already committed crimes in Tripoli, they have burned houses in Tajoura, in Souk el Juma, in Tashnoun, in Al-Arada, they have kidnapped people, they have killed people walking in the streets who were ordinary citizens just because they were well-known supporters of the government, not military people but just normal civilians, they have attacked shops they have taken money from shops, and the fight is not over.
We are really fighting them and defeating them in many neighbourhoods, and yet although they haven't suffered yet, they have already started their wave of crimes. If burning houses, burning cars, kidnapping people, killing people in the streets is not crimes, then what is. The world cannot claim that it did not know.
Since early morning you know you need to stop this disaster from taking place. As for us, we will fight, we have whole cities on our side, they are coming en masse from everywhere to protect Tripoli to join the fight, people have the right to fight for themselves, and their families and their property and their future.
People will not give up. I talk to people and ask why are you fighting and the answer is always: I have no other way out. I would want peace, to sit down, negotiate and stop this madness, if I don't fight I would be killed, because I belong to a family that supported the government, or I belong to a tribe that made its voice clear, or I belong to a neighbourhood... so people are terrified and fighting out of fear, and the other side (rebels) are fighting out of fear as well.
NATO should not provide immediate and direct support for one side in a civil war. This is illegal and immoral. One side is killing and NATO is giving them support.
NATO will be held responsible, morally and legally, for the deaths taking place in Tripoli, this night, last night and in the coming nights. They cannot say that this was not expected to happen. They are rocketing our city and they have indeed killed many children, many men and many women. We will fight because we have the right to. We have the leader Qaddafi, he led us in this confrontation for dignity and our freedom from NATO's agendas. Qaddafi should lead us for our peace, our democracy, and our negotiation. -- mathaba #

http://www.mathaba.net/news/libya